Is GM's EV1 Still the Best Electric Car Ever?

Even today, if you want to make an engineer's blood boil, there's a good chance you can do it by mentioning General Motors' EV1, produced from 1996 to 1999. For many, the subject conjures up images of truckloads of cars being needlessly hauled off to the crusher.

A significant number of engineers, who have torn down and evaluated electric cars, see the EV1 as a monument to the art of automotive engineering. If it used today's lithium-ion batteries, they say, no electric vehicle ever made could touch it.

"When it comes to pure electric vehicles, the EV1 is still the best that's been built in the last 15 years," noted one engineer, who didn't want to be named for competitive reasons, but who has torn down and evaluated every production EV that's been made since the early 1990s. "The EV1 was a fully-developed, all-around vehicle. Today, no one has the resources to do what GM did."

For those who don't remember it well, here's a short primer on the EV1. Introduced by General Motors (GM) in 1996, the EV1 was a two-seat electric coupe that was designed from the ground up with the best technologies available at the time. It was one of the first vehicles to use an aluminum spaceframe, which made it about 40 percent lighter than steel.

Engineers then joined the frame with aerospace-grade structural adhesives, thereby eliminating many of the welds. They also made body panels from composites -- again, to cut weight -- and added a lightweight suspension with help from Lotus Engineering. Moreover, the vehicle had the most advanced power electronics available at the time, and GM engineers spent thousands of hours matching the EV1's AC induction motors to the vehicle.

Materials weren't the only way of boosting the EV1's energy efficiency, however. Design engineers used low-rolling-resistance tires and sculpted the body down to drag coefficient of 0.195, which is still considered by Wikipedia to be the lowest in the history of production cars. By comparison, the Chevy Volt reportedly has a Cd of 0.28 and the Nissan Leaf, 0.29. Both of those figures are better than the auto industry's average of 0.35 to 0.45, but still far short of the EV1's.

The result was that a modified EV1 captured an electric vehicle speed record in 1997, hitting 183mph.

GM's EV1 still has the best drag coefficient of any production car to date, at 0.195. (Photo courtesy of GM.)

"It's better than the Leaf," our contact told us. "And the Tesla -- which is certainly faster but costs $120,000 -- still is far less sophisticated that the EV1."

There is, of course, the issue of the battery. The EV1's Gen2 version employed a nickel-metal hydride pack, which had an energy density of about 90Wh/kg. In comparison, today's lithium-ion batteries reach 140Wh/kg. The higher energy density enables today's EVs to cut weight.

Even there, however, is still a small debate. The EV1 supposedly offered 160 miles of range (a doubtful figure, by today's EPA criteria), but even if we cut that down to 100 miles, it's still more than Nissan Leaf's. What's more, many engineers don't like the Tesla Roadster pack, which employs 6,800 "18650" batteries (each slightly larger than an AA), connected in series.

Either way, they say, the EV1's supremacy would be beyond debate if it had today's battery packs. "The new battery would mean the EV1 could be about 500 lbs lighter (than the others) for the same range," our contact said. "But aside from that, the EV1 wouldn't need to change. It was that advanced."

To be sure, not everyone agrees with that assessment. As late as 2008, Time Magazine placed the EV1 on its list of "The 50 Worst Cars of All Time." What's more, many EV1 detractors have reasonably pointed out that GM spent between $80,000 and $100,000 per vehicle, which is a debatable figure, but one that nevertheless suggests that a comparison of the EV1 and the Leaf isn't appropriate. Finally, there's the issue of size -- the EV1 seated just two people.

Still, it's hard to argue that the vehicle's engineering was far ahead of its time.

"Microelectronics, miniaturization, better batteries -- all of those things have happened since the introduction of the EV1," our contact said. "But the results don't indicate that we've gotten that much out of it. Yes, we've got better batteries today, but imagine what the EV1 could have done with those batteries."

The answer is definetly not. If you believe that the EV1 was the best, you've never encountered a Honda "EV Plus". The Honda was a much better vehicle. My wife & I had an EV Plus for several days. It would have fit our needs very well as a second car. My wife's employer had a (free) charging station, that usually sat empty. The Honda held 4 adults comfortably & had a range of ~125 miles. As was the the EV-1, the EV Plus was leased only, & at a loss to the carmaker.

We did not consummate the EV Plus lease, only because our county had run out of state subsity allotments for electric vehicles. Our county, Ventura of Cal., had 5 allotments. We were no. 6 on the list & could not get the allotment.

I moved this thread off to the inactive side of things and had no intention of following it any longer, but I am compelled to respond to this. I do not know what irks me more: your arrogance at presuming to know what everyone in the world should have or your assumption that we agree that all things are to be equal. I spent time living abroad where people only wanted to know where their next meal was coming from and could not have cared less as to whether we drove EV's or Sherman Tanks, so long as it was not through their village.

I suggest that you apply your same logic to the time of the civil war and extrapolate thing forward from there. Before the internal combustion engine, the common mood of transportation was by horse. Fast forward to today and without technological advances, where in the world would we find land enough to grow the grass to feed all of those horses and how are we to dispose of the resulting manure?

You are right the available space will not change, but do not assume man has exhausted ways in which resources are to be utilized. Unless of course you still light your house with whale oil and commute by horse and buggy.

1. Is everybody in the world entitled to a similar BASIC standard of living? I think yes.

2. With the US average as a lifestyle we all aspire too can the world afford to have everyone live like that? I think that as an estimated 3.5 earths in resources and space is needed (and we don't have that) the answer is NO.

We a few choices:

1. Have to have a world where a select few live like kings and the rest live in abject poverty like in 3rd world countries.

3. We need to reduce the world population to 2billion very quickly while we still can (do you want to be one of the ones to go voluntarily?)

4. We need to totally rethink how we live including giving up a lot of the things we take for granted like range rovers, multi car families and lots of other stuff.

There are other questions and choices, but these are just a few to give the discussion some perspective. The things that won't change are available space, available resources, and almost everyone's perceived expectation that they have a right to anything they want without repercussions.

God bless you. You not only talk the talk, but walk the walk. I am sure you live a happy life with the choices you make, but it is not for me. You do it for your kids and that is honorable.

Some of my fondest memories of childhood come from time spent with my father in our boat. If you ask my kids I am sure they will also be able to point to early morning fishing trips on the lake in our boat as memorable and enjoyable experiences.

I guess I was thin skinned about the pollution comment so I plead guilty. I like to cook on charcoal, we do enjoy fires in our fireplace and my electric comes from a power plant. All of which is polluting somebody's air including my own. But I do not feel the least little bit guilty about it. I do not know what that says about me as a person, but I do know I have a beautiful wife of 44 years, have raised three great and productive kids and lead a happy life with my choices. None of which involve an electric car.

The EV1 was pretty good but had a few problems that the LEAF does not, below are a few.

The EV1 only sat 2 people with very liitle room for storage. The LEAF sits 5 and can hold a lot with fold down read seats.

The EV1 was leased only and then crushed. The LEAF can be bought, leased or even rented.

The EV1 had very high EMF given off. Read the Swedish TOC standards of 2 m-gaus or hight and the EV1 had 4 to over 20 I recorded. The LEAF is clean on EMF !

My LEAF can go 140 miles on a charge or if you drive like many peole only 60-100 miles. I only charge to 80% on an in car timer at 2 am so I help the GRID by using excess at off peak hours. An EV1 had not such options.

The EV1 used aluminum body and magnesium seat frames tryibng to reduce weight. That too expensive and didn't help much. The LEAF is made of recyclable matterials.

The EV1 had NiMH batteries which were good at the time but dies in the heat , I live in AZ and never had any problems with my LEAF batteries. They are good in cold and heat.

The EV1 was hand made 1 at a time. The LEAF is being made in a new factory in TENN. with a projected 150,000 a year possible along with 50,000 battery packs for sale to others.

Overall the LEAF is the car that is chaging the world. It's just in time and will get better. The EV1 was stopped as soon as GM could stop it and crushed. No mandates were needed with the LEAF. The LEAF was also just shown in smart money NOV 2011 as the best car for least cost to own and operate compared to many others over a 5 year total cost life. The batteries are warrentied for 10 yeats 150,000 or in non clean car states 8 years 100,000

Hey Bill... I had a 60ish MG Midget... Fun to drive, but kinda like riding a skateboard when next to a semi... No worse than a motorcycle though.

Loved my VW Bugs too. Very basic and easy as pie to work on. A couple of them had second lives as dune buggies.

I like the newer vehicles for comfort features though. EV1 legend talk always makes me think of the selective memories I have about the Bug... The heater was the pits, defroster too. Long trips felt... long... Gas mileage was good but not up to what I get now in my Accord w/air.

You're right... CFC was a waste to be sure. The 2 people that I know who used that program traded in $1000 plus value and bought Hyundai’s.

Electric cars replacing ICEs cars for the masses still are a ways off... and the EV1 probable looks better in the rearview mirror than it did in the driveway.

> Of course my boat is a lifestyle choice and that is my point. I chose the boat over an EV

You were accusing EVs of being toys for rich people... and you haul a boat around with a huge vehicle. My EVs are used for transportation, and they save me money as a great perk. I can only assume that your tow vehicle (and boat) cost more to operate than my EV becuase - why yes, I DO power my entire home and car with solar power. And since my PV system was paid off five years ago, I have paid nothing for my 10k+ miles per year. No energy and pollution waste from oil changes, tuneups or fuel. I have an entire website devoted to EVs and solar if you're interested.

My point: Boats and huge vehicles to tow them are toys. My solar-powered EV allows me to earn a living while not polluting my air or yours. You use "need" in a cavalier way. I contend that having reliable transportation is a need in our modern society. Towing and operating a boat for fun is not.

My "insulting" air pollution remark? You ask how I will dispose of my battery, and you don't wish to talk about how you are disposing of your gasoline - both in your tow vehicle and your boat? You are polluting my air and water. And if that sounds like an insult, I'm not sure how to respod. Every time you drive your truck or boat, you cause pollution. I'm at year nine with my batteries and zero operational pollution (recall the solar energy). There is a market for the used battery pack, and even when it is time to recycle, battery recycling in this country is one of the big success stories.

You worry about all the toxic chemicals in batteries and where they come from. We can't compare EVs to rainbows and the laughter of children. They must be compared to the gasoline vehicles being driven today. I have no illusion that building or disposing of an EV is totally green and clean. But compared to a gasoline vehilce - there's no contest.

I used to drive a truck, own a power boat and motorcycles. I now drive a solar-powered EV, and own a kayak and bicycles. The main catalyst that caused the big change for me? Having a child. How can I justify what we're doing to their future when we KNOW the damage we're doing? I'm not perfect. I'm definitely not sustainable. But I'm way closer than I was 10 years ago.

130,000 electric miles without an oil change, tuneup, or a drop of fossil fuel.

Ah! New one on me. In modern auto tech lingo, ICE is Internal Combustion Engine, AKA, the enemy. ;)

To put your mind at ease, please hear this - while HVAC usage can cause some reduction in range (just as it does in an ICE vehicle) none of the other entertainment items adds up to anything significant. Using wipers, playing the radio or DVD - are all insignificant compared to the traction power demands. HVAC is the only "accessorty" that reduces range. And even that is easily overcome by simply driving 2 mph (at most) slower at freeway speeds.

Some cars are more reliable than others, but even the vehicles at the bottom of this year’s Consumer Reports reliability survey are vastly better than those of 20 years ago in the key areas of powertrain and hardware, experts said this week.

As it does every year, Consumers Union recently surveyed its members on the reliability of their vehicles. This year, it collected data on approximately 1.1 million cars and trucks, categorizing the members’ likes and dislikes, not only of their vehicles, but of the vehicle sub-systems, as well.

A few weeks ago, Ford Motor Co. quietly announced that it was rolling out a new wrinkle to the powerful safety feature called stability control, adding even more lifesaving potential to a technology that has already been very successful.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.